Don’t you think a lot of the sequence in which they discover the lifeless bodies of Monica Randall’s family members, for instance, or of the good villain (El Primero) played with masterly skill by José Bodalo?

[quote=“scherpschutter, post:47, topic:1756”]The text on the back says Sylvester Stallone co-produced it.
I noticed there was some discussion on this in the thread. Has anybody found out more about this?[/quote]

I can’t see how this could be possible. Sly would have been no more than 20 when this film was made and he does not come from a movie background.

[quote=“JonathanCorbett, post:50, topic:1756”]In my opinion among the SWs directed by Cicero this is definitely the best.

Someone may be annoyed by the fact that there are no less than three women of rare ugliness, but that is a deliberate aesthetic choice aimed at giving the film eccentricity.

It is extremely improbable

In any case Stallone should play a soldier, not a Mexican (source Nocturno Forum).[/quote]

In that case I’ll have to watch it again!
But probably only the beginning, the best part of the movie

I understand that these ugly women were a deliberate choice, and it didn’t bother me
The first 15 minutes are okay, and there are a few scattered good moments throughout the movie, but overall this combination of ultra-violence and tongue in cheek humor (occadionally verging on slapstick) didn’t really work. And what to think of Martin’s haircut …

Sylvester Stallone used to be credited as an actor for this one at IMDB years ago. Somebody later on removed it but then he was listed as a co-producer… and now that has been removed as well.

I have an old photo of him somewhere which might be from a western, there is an indian with a gunbelt across his chest holding a rifle and Stallone has a stetson and maybe some sort of uniform on… A quick look at his credits doesn’t seem to have any role like that in them?
Anyways if I remember correctly it didn’t look very spaghetti to me. (I haven’t seen this film)

EDIT: Meant to say that the photo looks like it was taken on a set of a western film, not from the actual film (if any even exist).
Aaand, I probably mentioned most of this on some previous page but am too lazy to look.

After the girl is confronted with the sight of her dead family members there aren’t “saloon brawls in Trinity style”, this would lead to a significant discontinuity while the film is rather homogeneous.

After the girl is confronted with the sight of her dead family members there aren’t “saloon brawls in Trinity style”, this would lead to a significant discontinuity while the film is rather homogeneous.

This brawl is before the dead family scene, but that doesn’t really make a difference (and there are light-hearted scenes afterwards); the point is that the mix is too daring. You can have a mix of comedy and violence (I think in Any Gun can Play it works quite well), but you can’t have Trinity like brawls and the slaugther of the McBain family (just an example) in one movie.

Edit:

I’ve changed the text a little, it says now:

“There’s a scene in which a young woman is confronted with the sight of her dead family members, who were slaughtered in brutal fashion by Major Loyd and his gang of cutthroats. You can’t mix this with saloon brawls in Trinity style.”

That was my point. It’s odd that you think the movie is homogeneous, my thoughts were completely different, I find it very incongruous, an uneven mix of elements that don’t go well together. There’s far worse out there than this movie, of course, but like Stanton I prefer Time of the Vultures (haven’t seen Giuda yet)